Just watched Beverly Hills Cop and realized this is the film that has that funny pursuit of a truck I remember watching some time in the 80s.

Beverly Hills Cop 1984 Trailer:

Eddie Murphy is fun as hell and there are some cool car chases. About 10 minutes before the end, a large number of police cars arrive at the mansion where the final duel took place, and the manner in which all the cars arrive to the same spot from two different directions in front of the mansion reminds me so much of GTA San Andreas. Crazy as fuck. One of the best soundtracks for a film too, by Harold Faltermeyer.

Fitty, you drive firetrucks and know something about trucks. Do you think the cigarette truck had a reinforced front end bumper or was American trucks from the 70s or 80s that sturdy? I think European trucks could not take all that beating without being reinforced in the front. They are tough but also constructed to deform and take up energy in a crash, they are not a tank.

They probably do it as cheap as possible, but building in a hardened steel bar in the bumper would be affordable if needed. But the truck took some damage, so maybe it was not modified. Even modern trucks are very hard in the front and can totally wreck cars without taking much damage, but that would be too many crashes. The movie was released in 1984 and I don't think it was a new truck, so my guess is it was from the 70s.

I found a site called Internet Movie Cars Database (IMCDb), and they have a topic about this cigarette truck: 1980 GMC Astro 95.You seem to be right Fitty, they say it's a 1980 Astro model (though one poster suggests late 70s). The poster Cycolac Fan says it had extra strong front bumper (as I suspected), and also mention a camera box behind the cab that I never noticed.

I have not seen other double trailers in America, only as "road trains" in Australia. Was double trailers legal only for a short period in the US? It's strange I've not seen more of them if they are legal.

Comments on scenes in the movie:(See the truck chase video, also embedded in my first post.)

At 2:01, what is causing the bus to spin out of control? I don't see anything causing it, it's like if they added the scene because they wanted it, forgetting to put a reason in the script.

At 2:24, the white VW Beetle is driving into the trailer for no apparent reason. Driver in panic and holding both hands on the face and not on the steering wheel? No plausible cause for this. If they wanted the Beetle to get under the trailer, they could have made it more credible by making it happen when the truck made a left turn in an intersection.This and the bus scene at 2:01 don't seem right to me, but all in all it's maybe the best chase I've seen in any film.

2:44: What sort of coupling is that?? Is it normal for heavy trucks in America? It let the trailer disconnect. I've not seen that sort of coupling on other than farm tractors. All heavy trucks in Europe must use this standard of coupling and it is very safe: VBG couplings (images), and drawbar eyes (images).

3:05: This scene after the truck has stopped reminds me so much about San Andreas cops. Actually the cops throughout the film reminds me about San Andreas on many occasions. And Alex Foley could be CJ's brother.

I believe the bus was making a hard (exaggerated) stop to avoid the fruit truck that was just demolished in the roadway (although it was pushed completely to the side so not much of an obstacle...) They probably just wanted to have a bus spinning because it looks "cool". Same thing for the white beetle and the stack of cop cars that ensues.

The hitch is a pintle hook/hitch. It is extremely common on commercial vehicles (large trucks with second or third trailers, landscapers, etc). The disconnection goes back to movie magic and the film crew wanting things to happen. Do you really think they just happened to get a shot of the hitch failing?

Some of those double and triple trailer configurations must be a nightmare to reverse. Are drivers actually required to do it? I got licenses for everything that moves on roads and in order to get the licenses I had to prove that I could reverse and turn in tight spots, including reverse the vehicle through a garage door just a little wider than the vehicle, without knocking down any walls.

We have the tractor semitrailers as displayed on your chart, and also this configuration that's not on your chart:Both configurations (tractor semi + this pic above) are about equally common here.

I hate two-axle trucks, they cause so much trouble every winter. They don't get enough traction and fail to climb up hills. Actually they are so bad climbing up hills that they don't cause as much problems as they could have, because they don't even get to the really long hills, they give up long before that, and that is when they do use chains on the wheels. And a road blockage can not happen at any worse place than in a long hill. The problem is the truck is too light so they don't get traction. Three-axle truck can carry more load, and they can take pressure off the third axle so that the middle (driving) axle get enough traction in an emergency.

Norway is almost nothing but mountains so I guess we have more winter problems than other countries, but I do know that Rocky Mountains can be an obstacle for any vehicle.

About the coupling. Yes I understand it was movie magic that made it fail, but the design has "fail" written all over it. It doesn't look safe for normal road speed at all. The VBG coupling I showed you is a much safer design, and it is automatic. You back the truck into the drawbar and the heavy duty bolt goes down through the draweye. The only source for fail here is the driver, he must check that the bolt is locked into position. The driver checks this when he is connecting the air hoses and power cables to the trailer.

I'm certain they make you back up with doubles. Not sure on triples but they probably do. In the real world you would find an open parking spot and disconnect the rear trailer(s) so you are left with one (or two) which makes it easier to back into whatever spot or loading dock.

As ignorant as America can be sometimes, if the pintle was a bad design we probably wouldn't use it for everything (military is completely pintle). It may not be automatic but it isn't too much fuss and as a good driver you should be back there checking connections and such anyway.

As ignorant as America can be sometimes, if the pintle was a bad design we probably wouldn't use it for everything (military is completely pintle). It may not be automatic but it isn't too much fuss and as a good driver you should be back there checking connections and such anyway.

The pintle looks like a much cheaper construction and I guess it's good enough for its purpose. I guess it's not meant to carry much weight as the trailers you use over there carry their own weight. Usually that is the case here too, but single-axle trailers are not very uncommon here, and if the trailer has only one axle the coupling must be designed to withstand a lot of down-force and up-force. These single-axle trailers have some advantages, they are shorter, lighter and cheaper, and much easier to maneuver. It makes sense to use a standardized coupling that works for all trailers, and we use the stronger type.

Our military use some simple couplings (probably a NATO standard) that looks like the pintle, but they are only allowed to drive at 40 km/h (25 mp/h)...